Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UTS Writers' Anthology (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Delete. Almost all of the creative text in this article was duplicated from or other official sources. Permission to use this text was not verified in spite of due notice and listing at Copyright problems/2009 April 20. Since the article has now been twice nominated at AfD with very little interest and since recreating it without the copied text would leave only an introductory sentence and a list, which would even further reduce any encyclopedic value, I have deleted it. There is no prejudice against creation of a clean version that verifies notability with proper reliable sources. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

UTS Writers' Anthology
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

last deletion discussion was barely a discussion. relisting for greater consensus for keep or delete. LibStar (talk) 05:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  --  J mundo 06:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.